Summary of Key Points
Dr. Gao Xiang, a doctoral candidate in creative writing, delivered a speech at the Shanghai Online Audio-Visual Creators Conference on the topic "AI Can Create Universes, but Not Thorny Roses." In his presentation, he shared his profound insights into the role of AI in literary and educational contexts. He argued that while AI can efficiently generate content and mimic various styles, it also has limitations such as producing homogeneous works and forced happy endings. He opposed the misuse of cost-cutting measures in artistic creation, believing they lead to the production of low-quality material and waste of resources. Gao Xiang was concerned that AI might discourage students from developing their interest in writing and creativity, potentially leading to cheating. He pointed out that the root of these issues lies not in AI itself but in the "template-based" approach of education. Ultimately, he suggested that humans and AI should work together, preserving the essence of authentic experiences and emotional expression in creative processes, while utilizing AI tools to enhance real-life experiences.
I. AI's "Superpowers" and "Fatal Weaknesses"
AI is indeed capable of remarkable things: it can generate poetry instantly, imitate the style of Western poets like Xi Chuan, and create music and animations. However, its limitations are also evident. For instance, when writing stories, AI tends to favor happy endings due to ethical constraints in its algorithms, resulting in unrealistic or awkward outcomes. Although its use in poetry can produce novel imagery (such as "quantum collapse" or "cyber sadness"), the repetition of similar phrases leads to a lack of originality. Gao Xiang compared AI to a knowledgeable companion, but it cannot replace traditional methods like mapping, transportation, or serving as a destination; it can only assist in gathering information and stimulating thinking—real creativity still requires human initiative.
II. "Cost-Cutting" as a "Ugly Term" in Art
Many advocate for using AI to reduce costs and increase efficiency in art, but Gao Xiang sees this as a flawed approach. He believes that true art relies on sincerity, not speed. Mass-producing content is akin to gambling; platforms may benefit from a few successful works, but the majority will be of poor quality. Moreover, AI requires significant amounts of energy, and overusing it is like wasting resources—just like throwing away bread and milk to produce a pile of useless papers or images. Artistic creation is not a factory assembly line; only works that take years to develop possess true value, and no amount of speed can replace this process.
III. AI Stealing Students' Joy in Writing
As a teacher, Gao Xiang is most worried about students losing interest and confidence in writing due to their reliance on AI. He recounted a student who initially showed great enthusiasm but became discouraged after using AI to complete assignments, believing that AI’s work was better than his own. Another student received a higher score for an AI-generated paper than one written by hand, leading to the latter feeling pressured to cheat. Gao Xiang questioned whether handwritten essays should become a form of intangible cultural heritage. He argued that AI simplifies the creative process to mere button-clicking and waiting for answers, depriving students of the excitement that comes from genuine effort and experience.
IV. The Root of the Problem: The "AI-ization" of Education
Gao Xiang believes that AI merely exacerbates existing issues in education. For example, in elementary school writing classes, students learn to memorize phrases and follow templates, turning writing into a mechanical imitation of existing texts— precisely what AI excels at. Language education focuses on language skills rather than literature, and reading comprehension is reduced to rote practice. Parents often prioritize sports and calligraphy over more creative activities, focusing solely on test scores. As a result, creativity is already underappreciated, and the introduction of AI only adds to this trend. Gao Xiang warns that if we rely on AI for everything, we will lose the value of human effort and expression.
V. The Right Approach to Working with AI: Using It as a Tool
Despite his concerns, Gao Xiang is generally optimistic about the potential of AI. He advocates for its use in areas where it excels (such as data research and image recognition) while emphasizing that humans should take charge of the creative process. He suggests stepping outside the classroom to engage in real-world activities like writing about nature or personal experiences. He cited examples of authors like J.R.R. Tolkien and George R.R. Martin, whose works require deep historical insight and genuine emotional engagement. Humans have unique advantages, such as the physicality of writing (like a calligrapher’s movement) and the tangible experiences of hiking or diving—these cannot be replicated by AI. In conclusion, we don’t need perfect creations from AI; what we want are works that are genuine, expressive, and full of emotion—the very essence of human creativity.
This analysis clearly outlines Gao Xiang’s main points, explaining how AI affects artistic and educational practices, and proposes solutions that help us understand the core contradictions of the AI era: true experiences and emotions are the irreplaceable elements of human creativity.